And it should be, given the asking price: at an MSRP of $999, the iPhone X (pronounced iPhone Ten, which I'll admit I'm still getting used to) is priced comfortably higher than many of its current competitors that also come with an emphasis on photographic prowess.

As with just about every modern high-end smartphone, the results of the picture-taking process on the iPhone are as much about clever software tricks as they are about the hardware. With the software and hardware combined, does the iPhone X truly offer image quality comparable to so-called 'real cameras?' Is artificial background blur driving the final nails into the interchangeable-lens camera coffin?

Of course, the answer isn't all that simple, and depends an awful lot on the preferences of the user behind the lens. But let's dive in and take a look at what Apple's latest smartphone shooter is capable of.

I have a question. On iphone 7+ (see dpreview review for example for technical details), using optical zoom or pressing 2X, does not actually engage optical zoom. Nor does it go to the second camera. pressing 2x or zooming, still uses the same Wide camera and just digitally zooming. Only engaging PORTRAIT mode guarantees that the second 52mm camera is turned on and used. Or some dedicated photo apps that also force the second camera to engage. Dpreview clearly talks about it in Iphone 7 + review.

Did it change in Iphone X? People use 'optical zoom' words kind of loosely with Iphone, I want to make sure it actually is optical and not digital zoom. You guys at dpreview don't even touch in this topic in Iphone X review. I just got iphone X and would like to know the truth here.

1. In the "cons" the reviewer mentions a lack of sharpness. Ehhhhh! That's it. End of review. So the camera is worthless for all but those not in need of quality looking pictures or willing to post-process.

2. On a side note, did he mention whether there is a charging light / message indicator? Apple is too stupid for my personal owning, but I do like to keep track of just how stupid they remain. And it seems to me that prior models force users to fire up the screen and look to see charging or messages.

My device has a clean LED that can be either red, green or blue depending on purpose. So from across the room after re-entering the house, I can within 1/5th of a second save the bother of walking over to check.

Plus like nearly all recent phones (and why I am keeping my Note-4), apparently you just get to throw these away when the battery dies? Okay, maybe pay the apple store (and for me, drive 65 miles to find one).

To alleviate this Apple has indeed made a way to detect battery charge, notification, etc without the use of a dedicated LED.... The Apple watch. It may add to the cost, but it does allow for a complete remote method to check notifications, battery charge etc, just by glancing at the watch.

Good information for me to better understand what is available and gain a further glimpse of the awkward insanity of Apple. All of that to save a tiny LED light. Still not available on the 10 that commands a $1,000 price and garners rave reviews. Thank you. So grateful we have an Android option.

I like attractive design, but no way am willing to give up basic functioning to achieve some teeny measure of the goal. Apple execs are dumb for that, the headphone removal and home button, plus inability to change battery. All of those are powerful-dumb.

Besides, the LED on my Samsung Note-4 can not even be seen unless on.

Your answer is reasonable in the realm of simple discourse exploring rationale. That may slightly explain their reasoning. Could be that the light being visible even if only while on bothered their liberal brains. Too much information.

Agree with you regarding the non removable battery. One can say having a removable back to expose a removable battery reduces effective weatherproofing, but then the Samsung S5 managed to have a removable back and good weather proof seals. That being said the majority of manufacturers now do not have the ability to easily remove the battery without the use of heat packs to permanently destroy the adhesive used to make the phone weather tight.

Also something to note all iPhones dating back to the iPhone 3G, all have screws to access the innards of the phone. New Samsung phones all require heat to release adhesive to gain access.

Samsung has gone stupid too. The S5 and Note-4 are the last models with removable battery, as you seem to already know. Precisely why I am using the Note-4 instead of 5. Their latest S8 and Note might have even deleted the headphones jack. At least execs there are not drunk enough yet to leave out the LED indicator.

BTW, the iPhone X is the best thing Apple has ever produced. And their customer service goes beyond the call of duty, and I found out in a recent experience where I thought I had cracked my screen (only cracked the screen protector, but left it on so I could continue to use the phone, only to find out 24 hours later, when Apple had shipped me a new phone overnight, that the screen itself wasn't cracked. Apple took back the replacement. No charge. Period. This is why this power user sticks with Apple.

@vardimsApple stated them self that they turned back to glass because of WC.And i never said all smart phones with glass or plastic support WC.The point is it is not possible with the old back element to support it so they had to change it.

When not doing paid work, the X is all the everyday camera I need. On vacation I add my gimbal. For rough stuff, I can use a Lifeproof and detachable floating strap. Video memories at 4K 60fps, pseudo LUT in CreativeCloud, edit in iMovie, and share all on the phone :) Of course I could do that on an 8, but that P3 OLED is sweet.

My first unit had a “Ghost touch disease” , the second has a green tint on the one third of the screen, when viewed in a dark. Getting another one tomorrow- the last one. So why would I care about how well it’s caneras perform ?!:)

Question for administrators. Why not include complete EXIF data with photos? Especially GPS info? It’s fun to be able to see where the photo was taken. You use Seattle often as a backdrop and I live in Bellevue. Plus I like seeing the camera settings.

We'll bear that in mind - generally, we keep location data out for privacy concerns, especially as some of our editors are making photographs of their families at their homes. I agree that for 'around the town' stuff, it's not much of an issue.

You are not required to sync the iPhone X with anything if you choose not to. But how is it bad to have an application that backs up your entire phone, including all apps, settings, photo, music, etc., making it easy to restore to a new one in case of loss, theft, breakage, etc.?

While I'm sure that the Samsung Xcover 4 is a fine budget phone, its camera isn't in the same league as an iPhone X. It doesn't have optical image stabilization, a dual camera for telephoto and depth of field, or quad LED flash. It doesn't do 4K video at all and its 1080P video maxes out at 30 fps, or 1/8th of the iPhone X framerate.

money grab money grab after you back up your phone and fill your 15 free gigs they want you to pay for more, i hook my samsung to my computer and drag drop backed up simple no money exchanged...and i have a canon that goes everywhere I go. and @ewelch Linux(but not the linux on your phone) has the best protection in the industry but nice try anyhow..

so-what-17 wrote "money grab money grab after you back up your phone and fill your 15 free gigs they want you to pay for more, i hook my samsung to my computer and drag drop backed up simple no money exchange"

Please stop spreading misinformation.

iTunes backs up my iPhone (and iPad) to my home computer (which is subsequently backed up to my two RAID 6 NAS devices of 8x3TB and 5*2TB), not to iCloud. I don't pay a penny to Apple for backups. Apple doesn't require that I back up to iCloud or use it in any way.

"Linux(but not the linux on your phone) has the best protection in the industry..."

You are incorrect, even when you exclude the only versions of Linux germane to this discussion -- the Linux versions on phones.

"... but nice try anyhow.."

Lose the condescending attitude. Nothing you've written about this topic or revealed about your qualifications justifies it.

No need to buy expensive cellcamera for the looks and brand of it because nobody would know what cellphone you have because you cover it with a bumper. So, you're phone looks thicker and larger with ugly bumper. Buy cheap ones and expensive bumper. They'd ask what phone you have. It never fails. And those people asking make themselves stupid.

My iPhone X has made 3 or four face-plants on the ground from chest high level (with a case that gives it 1mm of protection) and it's screen protector has been shattered. But there's not a single mark anywhere on either side. It's not fragile. I'm just clumsy.

while not a primary component of the camera itself ,...the screen of the iphone x is utilized to review images and generally view them later at one leisure

a colleague of mine who has been using apple as long i i can remember and who knows of my materials analysis backround recently asked me to look at some issue with the screen , namely scratches after only 5 weeks of use

using a hastings triplet loupe i surveyed the screen and it is literally cris crossed with scratches some simple microscopic lines some are deep and visable even with the screen operationallooking at his old 6plus which i asked to see there is n where near the damage afteryears of use without screen protector

i think apple should replace his screen and told him persue this i fould this strange and unacceptable

sarah why do you always write thrump 2016 ... do you earn a few dollars a post ?why would what was written above elicit such a garbage comment from you ? ive stated that the x screen was heavily scratchd in about 5 weeks i told him to approach apple with the problem

then in your typical nonsense reaction you say :

"Why does every one of your comments always end with someone or some entity/group"deserving" something?"

what a stupid response , agenda driven response to my comment ...sarah you are both transparent and vile.....

... everyone here knows you here to divide and sow discord ..you are also a fake ... making up nonsense regularly ... "polar bears" lol

just now you are trying to rally the apple users ... but they are smarter than your shenanigans

you are a paid keyboard warrior ... a pathetic existence driven by a tribal psychosis

i told my friend that five weeks of use of the iphone x should not look worse than years of use with the iphone 6 ... i stand by that .. you simple minded clown

"burn you say "??? sarah you we outed weeks ago with your phony climate change rants ... your trump rants... your lame attempts to whip up a left right divide at dpr

i hope that you will soon be banned here for the garbage you post here ..you clearly are on a paid mission to disrupt normal conversations here and to inspire the same artificial ccultural divide... what country do you work for

I see Sarah The Paid Troll is employing the completely debunked meme-of-the-day: "the memo dropped." Last week it was "Millennials" and "Socialist Mob." What are you being paid to push this crap, Sarah?

F-stop equivalency is moot in a cell phone camera. The f stop is the f stop for light gathering ability - it's why it's in a non-dimensional form. Wanting to know the equivalent DoF is pointless in a modern flagship phone as the output is processed to the DoF you prefer with a slider control.

The correct question is "how effective is the selective DoF in eliminating processing artifacts?"

It would be something like F-infinite and everyone know that at F-infinite you can't take any picture. There would be no light falling on the sensor you know because of total light. No light = no pictures.

Just returned from a month travelling in Asia, and for the first time in my life (65yrs) I took only my cel phone, iPhone X. No camera. Love the photos that I got. The iPhone X with its face ID security is so fast that I got many shots that I would have missed while waiting for my Canon S120 to gear up. And how nice to travel with only a thin cel phone in a pocket. I don’t often print over 8 x 10, so the iPhone X is adequate for my needs. I can’t see travelling with a camera in the future.

Here is what I took away:1. The software that does the processing for lighting and DOF is pretty good and realistic looking, though not perfect.2. Image stabilization gets steadily worse as the resolution and shutter speed increase.3. RAW images are the best place to start if you want control of noise and everything else--just like "real" cameras.4. Tiny sensors have come a long way in 10 years. They still have some issues but I can see why the phone market has taken away from ILC market. 10 years ago I don't think I would have ever thought cell phone cameras would be plenty good for the 95% who don't want to carry a bag full of lenses. It will continue to with the exceptions of those of us who needs more control and the highest quality on large shots.

Good review, but I think you missed to touch upon two things that makes the iPhone great for photo and video: 10-bit colors and the iMovie app. With these two, I can do a lot of swift editing directly on the phone that just can't be done on an Android.

Sometimes I think people here are like the annoying "audiophiles" who don't enjoy music that isn't played with the "right" audio equipment.

The most recent smartphones produce great images. Not technically better than DSLR's, but certainly enjoyable for the majority of people who look at the image as a whole rather than each pixel.

The iPhone X is top of the pile for many people and fair play to those who go out and take great photos with it. I can see why they don't give a damn what people on the internet think of them. Photography with any camera you choose can be enjoyable.

the objectionable part of their attitude isn't that they don't enjoy "music" on things other than their high-end equipment, it's when they can't stand hearing opinions that show other kinds of equipment can be almost as good and then, they have to express their armchair opinions instead of listening to experts who do this for a living.

Nobody tell Sarah that every good SLR lens on the market is made of glass, and yet many photographers have learned not to drop them. I shudder to think what a beautiful piece like the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 would look like under a year of her care.

Good review and nice photos from a smartphone. It is clearly better to use the RAW capture option if you want better quality. Also nice to see a comparison between the HDR feature and processing from the DNG capture.

While my Pixel doesn't behave extremely different (it's also just a smartphone), i honestly do not get how every reviewer always gives those high scores to iPhones. The higher ISO pictures (500 and 800) are simply ridiculous. The low ISO pictures are something older Samsung S5 etc already managed.

Here is a tip, I just picked up a Nokia Lumia 930 on Ebay for £55.00, it was top of the range a couple of years ago, it has a dedicated shutter button, a great hi res screen, 2gb ram fast processor and great build quality, The Pureview camera is the best I have seen from any smartphone, it was running Windows Mobile 8.1 which was fine but was easily upgrade d to the latest Windows 10 operating system which is very similar to a desktop, I am delighted with it and it was £950 cheaper than this Apple, I also find the (sadly discontinued) Windows Phone 10 operating system and the great camera app excellent, support for this OS will continue for a few years yet and I haven't found an app that I wanted that was not available....Bargain :-) PS it is also a really good phone too

Nokia 808 is indeed very good but unfortunately not a practical phone anymore because of the Symbian operating system, the 930 camera is pretty close, I think just as good personally and I like the performace and OS

there's no difference in function, performance or experience between an outdated OS like symbian and an outdated OS like windows mobile when making phone calls and photography - you press the buttons to take photos or pick up calls. of course it's understandable you'll believe and say what you own is nicer than what you don't own

There is a big difference, Windows 10 mobile has only just been discontinued, it doesn't feel outdated "yet" Facebook, Whatsapp , Fitbit, Image resizers, etc etc etc are still available and work fine, of course this will change , but for now, Windows 10 mobile is still pretty up to date unlike Symbian, as I said, I havent yet found an app that I wanted that is not available for Windows 10 mobile, it is still just as useful "for me" as Android or IOS would be, in 2 years it may well be different, but for now, £55 gives me a phone that performs "for me" as well as a £700 Android or IOS device, hardware-wise, the 930 is pretty high spec and the 950 is even better with 3GB Ram and a great screen and fast processor, I think higher end Windows phones are a smart buy right now

Yep, the detail resolvable on an 808 is as good as on a D800 Nikon in good light. And, there is usually more detail due to the massive depth of field it has. This iPhoneX camera gives worse results than a Nokia N8 12MP sensor from 2010, but the Nokia has no Raw file capability and no 4K video. Its sensor is bigger than the iPhoneX and one must question WHY exactly nobody is using 808 Pureview size sensors now- is it the bump the greater distance needed to focus the lens creates? Well, all I can say is that it is SO much more comfortable to hold and use!! Nobody needs a cameraphone with a flush flat back: I would much prefer a comfortable rounded rear!! better sensor, zoom lens possibilities... bigger battery.... what's not to like?

I’m surprised that a review on a photography gear review site didn’t mention the serious reflection issue all iPhone X’s suffer from. I love my iPhone X to pieces and you’d have to pry it from my dead hands but the camera is completely useless in low light whenever there are any nearby light sources. The culprit is the back sapphire plate sealing the cameras from the elements. It’s like shooting through a window at night.

The reason camera phones are the most popular camera in the world is that 98% of people do not pixel peep nor do they want a long menu of options. The ability to turn on the the camera, shoot and share a file, is what these phones are best at. The same 98% either no longer use nor will ever buy a stand alone camera is because photography should be as simple as it was over a hundred years ago. The revolutionary Kodak Brownie camera enabled anybody to capture a photograph and this revolutionized photography. This camera was compact, preloaded with film and had no controls other than a shutter lever and a film advance. Once the film was all exposed you return the camera for processing and get another preloaded camera. Simple! Complexity is fodder for a very select few who only immerse themselves in details but have nothing to show for it. Most of the forums here are evidence of that.

"Complexity is fodder for a very select few who only immerse themselves in details but have nothing to show for it."I agree with your first half, but not with the conclusion. My family and friends seem to be happy to receive pictures I take with my DSLR, and I am sure most amateur photographers are able to produce results that are visibly better than what you get from a phone.

That said I agree with the rest of your post. It is good that phones get better and better, since most people will never use anything else, and are happy with the results they get. I am also looking forward to a new phone with better photographic capabilities for all those time when I don't want to lug my DSLR's along ;)

We have reached the terminal point of diminishing returns with regard to the price/value tradeoff. These photos don't look like they came from a $1,000 phone. They look like they came from a $400 or $500 phone—at best. Tim Cook seems to be daring the public to call BS with his outrageous price gouging but no one dares to say anything. For $1000 you can get a really nice camera and a cheap cellphone to act as your uploading device.

100% agree. I have a 2 year old, then £300 oppo r7 plus phone with an f2.2 lens. Pictures in good light are decent but I wanted more.

Faced with spending £500 for a contract free replacement, I decided to keep the phone, bought a USB-OTG to SD card adapter, a Nikon coolpix A (APS-C, F2.8, 28mm eqiv) used for £280 and shoot raw+jpeg.

I find sharing jpegs to the phone is good enough in most cases with a quick edit in snapseed. It means I can use dead time, while on public transport for example, rather than being such in frontomt of a computer at the end of the day or a vacation.

Same here. I bought a like-new Nikon Coolpix A for $250 from B&H. I picked uup the eye level viewfinder for about $125. Then I got the Metz 26 AF2 flash, which I also use with my D7200 when I'm traveling light. I just don't use a phone for taking pictures.

"For $1000 you can get a really nice camera and a cheap cellphone to act as your uploading device."

But then you'd have to carry around two devices and any interface gear needed for the two. There's no reason to spend $80,000 on a nice SUV when a $25,000 truck and a $35,000 sedan would do what you need. Or a $30,000 mini van, for that matter. And yet they can't keep the $80k SUV's on the lot. Maybe there's something more than just the camera and an internet connection that matters to people?

My point is that if you're buying this thing with your own money rather than receiving it from your job or your parents, you're getting a so-so camera as part of an overpriced cellphone. However, from the way it is marketed you would think that it's a Leica M3 magically reduced to the size of a chocolate bar.

Apple is not the barrier-breaking supernova it was in the days of the Quadra 950. It's just another slightly shady consumer products company now, grinding out the same tired products in barely different iterations.

The tech press—and we consumers—have to start thinking of Apple as no different from Whirlpool or Sears rather than the second coming of Bell Labs.

I don't think gullible is the right word. Is it hype that you can combine 2-3 devices into one? That it has the backing of millions of developers? That it runs quickly and efficiently? That it offers user interface advantages over other devices? Hardly. For someone making $200k/yr, it's a trivial cost, and there are 10 million consumers just in the US who make more than that. If I were rich, you'd be darn sure I spent whatever it took to maximize my efficiency, and if that means *not* carrying around two devices with the associated connection gear, it's a small price to pay.

*I don't own an iPhone, but the current versions really are efficient at what they do.

I was surprised the review mentioned nothing about the default Live mode, which takes 20 photos at once, and then automatically shows you only the one it thinks best.

Since that guess is not always correct, I've been wanting to look at all 20, delete the bad ones, and choose my own favorite among those remaining. Sometimes I manage to do that, and sometimes not. So I definitely need more instructions on how that works.

But when shooting photos of fast-moving kids and animals, Live mode really helps.

Considering the huge price gap (+30 to 54%) between the 7 series and the X but yet relatively modest 13% increase in average phone price, worldwide none of the 3 new phones were top sellers relative to their predecessors when they were released.

They sold 1 million mess phones in a quarter that had one week less than last year’s. Hence it would be the same or slight year on year growth if adjusted. With more profit.It is obvious that many commentors for some reason would like apple to fail. And that precludes neutral reading of the facts. Neutral fact is that they did very wellAcross the board, only macs slipped a bit. I wouldn’t mind failing in my work the way Apple does, if Inwould believe all the conjencture.

TrojMacReady What phones increased relative to their predecessors? That's right, none. The mobile phone market is saturated and only the cheap Chinese android phones sell well worldwide. Average phones.

Total the three new iphones release."Apple says the iPhone X, iPhone 8, and iPhone 8 Plus lineup brought in the highest revenue of any iPhone lineup in the company's history. "I bet every company wished they had these problems.

No matter how we slice it, there were 2 release moments instead of the usual 1 the last quarter and 3 instead of 2 new phones, yet unit sales went down and average price of all iPhones sold increased less than the increase of the 3 new models would suggest. So older phones sold better than expected, new phones less. Hence all the start downwards adjustments of essential parts, even those with only one supplier (OLED).

That has nothing to do with a wish to fail, no need to enter anyone's personal emotions. Just rational observation. Yes, the market is saturated and consumers make their phones last long, simply because even older phones are now fast enough for most. Even Apple can't escape that fact. I'm just not very sensitive to marketing speak that always makes everything sound perfect, while trying to cover some obvious stains.

I'm a bit confused by DPR's conclusions.In the Cons: Very slow shutter speeds in low light can result in blurry image.Huh what? Are we stating the obvious here as a con? What's next? "Cons: It can't make you coffee"

As for comparing RAW to OOC jpgs, in my opinion the OOC jpgs just look better and are always sharper. From my testing if you go a step further and apply some very basic editing to them, combined with a more advanced shooting app like Halide, where you can control shutter speed and ISO, the iPhones jpgs are just stunning.More importantly the OOC jpgs are only going to get better and close the gap in areas they're lacking with newer versions of iOS and the phones.

What's so confusing? In the review they mention that the phone tries to keep the ISO levels as low as possible, which results in unusually long shutter speeds. Which makes sense, since this "camera" basically isn't usable at high ISO levels.

I haven't been able to find what the maximum ISO value is the X allows, but the iPhone 8 only went up to ISO 800. But looking at the ISO 800 shot of the woman at the table, the X is already hopeless at that point, so it makes sense that Apple would program it to use longer shutter speeds than an actual camera would.

There is always going to be competition between big brands, i.e. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony, Canon, Nikon etc. For as long as we have consumers buying products for "brand name" there will be delays in making innovative products. We need smart consumers to fast forward the slow progress of any proruct, not loyal consumers.

also, you might be overestimating the homogeneity of consumer's needs. there are a number who will pay for the cheapest usable product available and those who will shed their product immediately to get the latest shiny object. "brands" are not just going to cater to one base.

George, I think you got too much credit by the Time Magazine article. You guessed the name right (easy), but Jobs did something completely different than you proposed. Just look up that Treo 650 that you accepted as a viable hardware option.

I think you was much more visionary in your second post in the same thread. The post where you called Donald Trump a president ... ;)

I have the x. I had the s7 edge and iPhone 7 Plus before. This X si the best camera ever had. I like to see my photos on tv of 50 inches and I love the quality of this iPhone. Also my father , that is fan of canon, is been impressed for the quality of this iPhone. At who think to can comparate it to an android, just don’t it. Because android don’t have quality of lens, also the pixels 2, and especially the software isn’t optimized to give you the best result. On a pixel 2 for example you have the same operation system, basically, of a smartphone of 80 euro. The same compression software about the photo. I don’t talk about the format only. So be smart. I saw it comparated to my ex s7 edge, on tv or computer I saw the poor quality comparate to an iPhone . An the camera of this X is 5 years forward every other smartphone.

Why should the iPhone X camera be better hardware wise? Or do you mean the second camera?The pure specs of the Pixel 2's camera are better as the sensor is larger.But the specs mean nearly nothing. Even the raw files can be much worse despite better specs.

I had a couple of tester phones end of last year and the X stands out as a well rounded and quality photo phone. And yes, I’m one of the very few suckers who bought one but I have clients who ask for iPhone pictures and I tend to deliver the best available at the Time of assignment, as do most of the pros who actually shoot this for publication.Maybe we’re at a crossroad where the real high end stuff does not appeal to the broader market, I heard Soderbergh is shooting his next movie on an iPhone. I’m sure they won’t be using iPhone 4 and 5s...

freediverx is right. An iPhone is a "real camera?" Please. I'm tired of the lines being blurred & traditions not being respected. Next thing you know we're going to argue that it's "narrow minded" and "elitist" to say that a man should only use the men's room. Oh wait...

My point is that an iPhone can only take quality photos within fairly limited conditions. If you want pretty snapshots in bright daylight, you're good to go. For anything else, you will be disappointed.

freediverxAn iPhone is a real camera. Just like a Medium format used "within certain conditions" (not sports etc.) is a real camera just like a GoPro etc. And I've taken many low light images that turned out just fine when i didn't have my other cameras with me.https://www.flickr.com/photos/25182288@N04/35705657865/sizes/o/

A compact digital camera or a DSLR has a vastly wider degree of versatility than an iPhone camera. If the iPhone's only function were its camera, few people would buy one.

Don't get me wrong... The iPhone is for all practical purposes the camera I use most—because it's the only camera that's with me 24/7. But I wouldn't dream of going on vacation or to some special event with nothing but my iPhone as a camera.

Thanks for the comments, as stated I think it’s a great photo phone and that I have clients requiring sometimes that images or video is shot with them. But mostly I do shoot Hasselblad MFD, or if a DSLR/35mm solution is more appropriate the 1DX II or Sony A9 and for moving image there’s mostly a version of an Arri Alexa on set. I get the quality difference.

iPhone X is over-hyped, over-priced and over-rated. Apple is rumored to halve production due to low sales to maintain the over-pricing. Apple stock price tanked at 5%. But if you look at Apple Stock Chart it goes up ... goes down ... up again and down again ... like camel's back.

Who'd buy iPhone X if they have working 6,7&8? It is like why buy G1xMiii when they have G7xMii working like G1xMiii and no body can know the difference.

Why buy or upgrade to Nikon D850 and collateral lenses when they have working Canons and older Nikons?

That is why dSLRs sales is grabbing at straws so is Apple iPhone X.

I will buy this behemoth when the price drops because this phone is waterproof. I like to videochat with Mom while underwater.

I agree with over-hyped and over-priced. But over-rated? Nope. What an amazing screen! I can read my newspaper on-line without squinting. Face ID is much better than a home button for us Minnesotans. The CPU is an order of magnitude faster than the competition. Etc.

To the original point, whether the iPhone X is overpriced really depends on the person considering it, their level of discretionary income, and the value they think it will provide to them. And if you have an earlier iPhone you are happy with then of course you don't need to get a newer iPhone, but it 8 or X.

SpencerSLGrossly overpriced was based on facts. The fact is the iPhone X sales fell well below expectations. Why?, it is overpriced. Can you give a better explanation. Of course you Apple fanboys, the ones who worship at the altar and wait in line to buy every new iPhone, will never admit that. Disclaimer, I own an iPhone 6s.

"What Kuo said is that Apple might stop producing new iPhone X units once they’ve made enough to keep shelves stocked until September. Kuo does suggest that this *might* be because sales of the iPhone X are disappointing (particularly in China), but Kuo’s record is only good regarding what is going on in Apple’s Asian supply chain, not why."

"If Kuo is correct that the iPhone X will be dropped from next year’s iPhone lineup, I don’t think the reason has anything to do with how well it sold."

"When the iPhone 3G debuted, Apple stopped selling the original iPhone. In fact, the more I think about it, the more it feels like it’s fair to say that the norm is for radically new iPhone form factors not to remain in the lineup at a lower price the next year."

Apple is going to discontinue the "X" at the end of the year, instead of offering it at a lower price in future years. That makes sense to me, since the "phone" part of the iPhone X is out-of-date. I plan to trade mine in at the end of the year.

Did anyone notice that the iPhone X default camera app are sucks!I mean, when you are taking a photo with it, then you adjust the exposure in the app, you'll find that the finale image is quite different from the screen, for example, when you taking a picture in a dark area,then you try to turn down the exposure, you can see it from the screen was exposed correctly, but the final picture you just take it becomes very dark, but from the screen everything are perfect!I try the 3rd party photography app like Camera+ or manual camera,they are works really well, don't have any issues with the exposure.

Yeah some issues. It doesn’t like reds for some reason. It also, occasionally “dragonizes” skin tones for no apparent reason. By really pumping up the micro contrast in some situations, the portraits turn out really bad.

Otherwise, I’m liking it as a simple product photography cam. I can get decent product photos in seconds, so I’ve stopped using my DSLR completely in that regard. Also having the 56mm lens / camera is nice

A quote from the review (on DPR) "Colors though are generally pleasing and images offer the perception of good detail at normal viewing sizes. If you zoom in to check out different parts of the scene, though, you'll notice that fine details really suffer"

Also, in conclusion they state the phone has good (not great or excellent) overall image quality...

Yes I read this... but wonder how many people really care about this marginal camera improvement. I certainly don’t. I pitty apple for finding themselves in a situation where all they can really do is feed the iPhone beast to grow (move the needle). Apple as it stands today will thrive and fall on one performance and profitability of the iPhone.

It may be prudent for them to start breaking the company to focus on specific categories since some of them are actually growing but to small to matter for their bottom line.

Maybe because only complete and utter gear-wankers still think you can't do photography with modern phone cameras. You have your heads so far up your FF-worshiping pixel-peeping butts, that you fail to realize photography isn't about equipment.

Phone cameras of today are simply amazing. People have been taking legendary shots for decades with infinitely inferior equipment. In case you are unable to take a good photograph with a camera because it has, and I quote, a "pin head sensor", then you are quite a pathetic "photographer" (please note the quote marks).

dpreview has been posting mobile phone reviews for years. also, people can ignore articles they don't care for instead of complaining in the comments, no matter how harmless some may think about comparisons to pinheads and skateboards are

MelchiorumIf by "gear-wankers" you mean real photographers vs snapshot taking soccer moms then I agree with you. Smartphones suck as cameras if you are serious about photography. Back in the day smartphone users would have been using Kodak Brownies.

@keisvot, you are probably right. I apologize for such a hostility. It's just that every time phones are mentioned on DPR, we get elitists posting comments talking about how phone photography is not a thing. As someone who has actually earned money from shots taken with my old phone (because I didn't have a camera with me) and understands what makes a good photograph, I get triggered sometimes by such stupidity. Though, again, I agree that my response was too harsh and I should have been more chill about it.

@tbcass, I am yet to meet a single real working photographer who would have said they couldn't take a great shot with a phone camera (and I've met quite a a number of them). I do know photographers though who did take such shots and got paid for them. So no matter how many times gearheads make claims that phones not being "real cameras", they aren't going to get any closer to the truth.

Yes, proper equipment will let you take better shots and phones are far from perfect tools for proper photography. However, contrary to proper equipment, your phone is always in your pocket and if you actually understand photography, it will be good enough for you to get a shot in many situations.

If conditions are right I can take an good photo with my iPhone. I'm assuming a compositionally good and artistically pleasing photo. The problem is the situations where the iPhone or any smart phone will take a photo that looks good above a 4x6 print is extremely limited. If you are shooting stationary people or scenery in good light fine but for anything else the phone camera won't cut it. The sensor is too small and the lens too limiting. You don't see people successfully shooting sports, wildlife, birds in flight or anything that needs to be printed very large with smartphones.

The famous photos with inferior tech you reference were taken with film and lenses which could produce photos with IQ vastly superior to any smartphone or even some digital cameras and were used by photographers skilled in their use. Ansel Adams used large format view cameras that produced IQ better than all but the best digital cameras despite their technological simplicity.

{tbcass} Is absolutely correct. I'll go one farther. It is appalling and ridiculous that anyone who calls themselves a professional would DARE use a snapshot-grade camera in their work. Are you kidding me? They're fine for the soccer moms taking snaps of Jr hugging Fido or college sorority girls taking duck-lipped selfies, but serious photographers? Oh please.

Back in the 1980s--and I know it's the year 2018 but in my opinion what was true in the 1980s is still true now--if you wanted to advance in your craft and be taken seriously, then you got at least a 35mm SLR. You would not DARE be caught dead using a Kodak 110 or Polaroid camera, EVER. It was beneath the dignity of a real photographer to be caught dead doing such a thing, using the camera that the everyday snapshooters used. You got something like a Pentax K1000, Nikon FM or Canon AE-1 and you learned how to use it. The same is still true today.

Good grief, we have models like the Sony RX100, if you need something small.

no matter how narrow one's definition of professionals, serious or real photographer is, dpreview is a photography website that discusses cameras in phones, and the problem is not with dpreview, it is the commenters with the superiority complex

A superiority complex is a GOOD thing, it means one has actual STANDARDS. I'm getting to where more and more I think "snobbery" and "elitism" is a GOOD thing at such times. It means you don't accept, say, that a microwaved Hot Pocket is something in the realm of the culinary arts, and that real golfers don't use broomsticks, and that tacos from Taco Bell are not the same thing as something made by someone who is from Mexico & makes it the right way.

Calling something superior that actually is superior is not having a superiority complex. :-) Trying to equate a smartphone camera to a real camera is an indication of overcompensating for an inferiority complex.

Melchiorum, that was gracious of you and I see why you took offense. I don't like to use my old phone for taking pics but I agree with you, the smartphones today are amazing and I'm looking to buy a new one.

More about gear in this article

We're nearing completion of our iPhone X camera review. In the meantime, we've been doing plenty of shooting testing portrait mode, lighting modes and everything in between. Take a look at a fresh batch of sample images.

For the past few weeks we've been running a series of polls to find out what you - our readers - think of the major product releases of 2017. It's time to announce the winners of the first round of voting!

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

The SiOnyx Aurora is a compact camera designed to shoot stills and video in color under low light conditions, so we put it to the test under the northern lights and against a Nikon D5. It may not be a replacement for a DSLR, but it can complement one well for some uses.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Professional commercial photographer Moe Lauchert shares an incredible gallery of film photographs he captured on Ilford HP5 with a Nikonos 5 while serving as a diver at NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory in Houston, Texas.

We've been shooting with a beta version of the Sony a9's upcoming firmware 5.0. While there's much more analysis to come, we can say it makes for a dead simple AF tracking user experience. Take a look at some of our samples.

The Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 is a compact and light-weight lens for full-frame Canon and Nikon DSLRs. We took it on grand tour of Seattle's top tourist spots and found it makes a pleasant, albeit wide, walking around lens.

Fujifilm has announced its new GF 100-200mm F5.6 R LM OIS WR tele-zoom lens. The lens, equivalent to 79-158mm when mounted on a GFX camera, has image stabilization (with a claimed 5 stops of shake reduction), a linear AF motor and weather-sealing.

Amongst all of the camera news yesterday, Sony also announced its new Imaging Edge mobile app, which replaces PlayMemories Mobile. Three desktop applications have also been updated, adding support for time-lapse movie creation.

Our intrepid team is in San Diego, for the launch of the new Sony a6400. In this short overview video, Carey, Chris and Jordan talk through the main specifications of the new camera, and what they might mean for photographers and videographers.

The Sony a6400 is the company's new midrange mirrorless camera, whose standout features include an advanced autofocus system, flip-up touchscreen LCD and oversampled 4K footage with Log support. Learn more as we go hands-on with the a6400.

Sony has announced major firmware updates for the a7R III, a7 III and a9. All three cameras gain improved Eye-AF, the ability to recognize and focus on animals' eyes, and timelapse capability. The a9 gets more sophisticated subject tracking.